Re: picking a new AF_* number for NETLINK ?

2014-01-17 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:19:02AM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > In porting the kernel openvswitch code to FreeBSD we > have implemented netlink sockets, so we need to pick a > number to use for AF_NETLINK/PF_NETLINK in the messages. > > Obviously we'd like ovs to be loadable as a module on existing

binary-only modules with SDT

2014-01-17 Thread Andriy Gapon
Does anybody know if there are any third-party binary-only modules that use SDT? -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-un

[CFT] updated ofwfb driver vt(9)

2014-01-17 Thread Aleksandr Rybalko
Hello hackers! I did updated version of vt's ofwfb driver, but have no HW to test. It will be very nice if someone try it on ppc/sparc device. Instructions on how to enable vt(9) (newcons) can be found here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Newcons Patch to HEAD in attachment. (hope it will not be strip

Re: picking a new AF_* number for NETLINK ?

2014-01-17 Thread Alexander V. Chernikov
On 17.01.2014 03:19, Luigi Rizzo wrote: In porting the kernel openvswitch code to FreeBSD we have implemented netlink sockets, so we need to pick a Wow, great! How deep you're planning to go with netlink support? E.g. sockets with NETLINK_GENERIC OVS-related CMDs, or NETLINK_ROUTE (and other f

Re: picking a new AF_* number for NETLINK ?

2014-01-17 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov < melif...@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 17.01.2014 03:19, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > >> In porting the kernel openvswitch code to FreeBSD we >> have implemented netlink sockets, so we need to pick a >> > Wow, great! > How deep you're planning to go wit

svn 260311 breaks gcc builds on releng9 ?

2014-01-17 Thread Luigi Rizzo
Hi, I am seeing an odd problem which seems to be triggered by svn260311 I have two machines running snapshots of stable/9 from last fall (one 255898 sep.26, the other 258126 nov.14). All is amd64 Build a recent head (260311 and newer) with gcc fails on the sep.26 machine: ... 19:

Re: svn 260311 breaks gcc builds on releng9 ?

2014-01-17 Thread Pedro Giffuni
Hello Luigi; On 17.01.2014 15:18, Luigi Rizzo wrote: Hi, I am seeing an odd problem which seems to be triggered by svn260311 I have two machines running snapshots of stable/9 from last fall (one 255898 sep.26, the other 258126 nov.14). All is amd64 Build a recent head (260311 and newer) with g

[head tinderbox] failure on i386/pc98

2014-01-17 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2014-01-17 19:57:58 - tinderbox 2.20 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2014-01-17 19:57:58 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012 d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 TB --- 2014

Re: svn 260311 breaks gcc builds on releng9 ?

2014-01-17 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > Hello Luigi; > > > On 17.01.2014 15:18, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > >> Hi, >> I am seeing an odd problem which seems to be triggered by svn260311 >> >> I have two machines running snapshots of stable/9 from last fall >> (one 255898 sep.26, the oth

Re: svn 260311 breaks gcc builds on releng9 ?

2014-01-17 Thread Pedro Giffuni
On 17.01.2014 16:07, Luigi Rizzo wrote: On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni > wrote: Hello Luigi; On 17.01.2014 15:18, Luigi Rizzo wrote: Hi, I am seeing an odd problem which seems to be triggered by svn260311 I

Re: svn 260311 breaks gcc builds on releng9 ?

2014-01-17 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 04:26:30PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > On 17.01.2014 16:07, Luigi Rizzo wrote: ... > The Apple change was incomplete so I guess the compiler in head is not > being strict enough. I removed the dead code and rebuilt. > Should be fixed as r260831. > > Thank you for the rep